Laserfiche WebLink
N • - <br />??'• <br />CITY OF NORTH OLMSTED <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MINUTES - APRIL.:26, 1983 <br />I. ROLL CALL: <br />Vice Chairman Burns called the meeting to order at 8:00 p.m. <br />Present: B. Gorris, J. Roberts, J. Wixted, J. Brown, and J., Burns. <br />Absent: T. Morgan <br />Also Present: Assistant Law Director J. Dubelko, Building Gommissioner <br />E. Gundy, Assistant City Engineer D. McDermott, Council- <br />man D. Woerpel and Recording Secretary B. Oring. <br />II. REVIEW AND CORRECTION OF MINUTES: <br />B. Gorris moved to approve the Minutes of April 12, 1983 as presented, <br />seconded by J. Wixted, and unanimously approved. <br />III. BUILDING DEPARTMENT REQUESTS: <br />(1) Signs: <br />(a), Springvale Country Club and No.Olmsted Golf Course Sign (Ord. <br />, 83-14), located in right-of-way at corner of Canterbury Rd. <br />and Butternut Ridge. Approved by Council (Ord. 83-14)fmon <br />March 1, 1983. Approved by Architectural Board of Review on <br />ApriT 20, 1983. <br />No representative present. Heard later in meeting. <br />(b) Casey's Restaurant, 27350 Lorain Rd. (Simon Sign Co.) <br />Pole sign.approved by Architectural Board on 12/22/82 <br />pole is now illuminated (original application did not <br />specify lighted pole) <br />Referred fxom BZD Committee for ARB and Planning Commission <br />. approval of pole. <br />Referred to Law Director by ARB on April 20, 1983. <br />No representative present.. Mr. Gundy advised the ARB motiorL <br />requesting a.legal opinion as to whether or not the illumin- <br />ated pole should be counted as part of the signage was ir- <br />relevant since the pole area had been included in the total <br />signage as required by ordinance because of the size of the <br />pole. At this time the illumination has been discontinued. <br />The issue now is if the Planning Commission want to approve <br />a lighted pole. The Commission agreed that this would start <br />a trend. J. Wixted moved to approve the Casey's pole sign <br />as originally submitted to.the Planning Commission, absent <br />the illuminated pole; that is, we disapprove the illuminated <br />pole, seconded by J. Roberts, and unanimously approved.